The war in Ukraine serves as one of the borders where the fate of multipolarity is being decided. Ukraine has chosen to align itself with the seventh Western hegemonic pole against Russia and the other BRICS countries.
by Aleksandr Gelyevich Dugin
We are currently witnessing a very important term, a significant shift, a paradigm shift – the global balance of powers. I believe that the recent meeting of BRICS countries, which included the acceptance of new members, marks a point of no return and a truly historic moment. What we see now in the world is a new structure for BRICS. Let me remind you that BRIC began with an approximate understanding of possible cooperation and perspectives of the so-called semi-periphery, according to Samuel Wallerstein’s categorization of the second world.
 |
| [Photo: Adolfo Félix/ Unsplash] |
So, we have the concept of three layers within the global system of capitalist development: The First World, represented by the West, as the hegemonic civilization at the core; the Second World, or the semi-periphery, comprised of great states that are highly developed but not as advanced as the core, represented by major powers like Russia, China, and India, with significant demographic potential and abundant resources, though not at the level of the First World. Then there is the Third Layer, corresponding to the undeveloped periphery, representing the Third World in some terms.
BRIC was considered a possible unification of the Second World – not the First, but not the Third; it was something in between. This idea was first proposed in 2011 by Mr. V. Putin, the President of the Russian Federation, with the aim of uniting these powers and creating a kind of club for the Second World, a club of the semi-periphery. Initially, BRIC consisted of Brazil, Russia, India, and China – second-world, semi-peripheral countries that were trying to consolidate and create a space for discussion on how to navigate the world with the firmly established hegemony of the First World and the ongoing process of trying to align with the Third World’s civilization.
This was the primary concept behind BRIC, and it initially included Brazil, Russia, India, and China as second-world, semi-peripheral great countries striving for unity. Afterward, Southern Africa joined this club. At that time, BRICS had relatively weak structures with no concrete projects or institutions, but this club gradually developed its own relations and principles. Finally, we arrived at the twentieth meeting of BRICS countries in Johannesburg this August, which was a very recent event.
What was of utmost importance during this BRICS meeting? It was the addition of Argentina, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the Emirates to BRICS. This was an extremely significant event in global geopolitics because, with these new members, BRICS now represents a fully scaled structure of the multipolar world. The inclusion of Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the Emirates has brought the Islamic Pole into BRICS, meaning that Islamic civilization is now a part of it. Brazil, which initially represented Latin America and South America within BRICS, was one of the first members of the BRIC organization. Now, Argentina, the second most important country in Latin America, has joined this multipolar institution. This is of utmost importance because Argentina, being a Spanish-speaking nation, complements Brazil, which is Portuguese-speaking. Historically, figures like General Perón and Getulio Vargas understood the necessity of unification between Buenos Aires and Brazil, forming an alliance that could serve as the core of Latin America. Other countries could then join this alliance to create a truly significant space uniting Latin American civilization, thereby forming a full-scale pole. In this context, having both Brazil and Argentina within BRICS is crucial.
The same applies to Ethiopia, a unique country on the African continent that maintained its independence and sovereignty during the colonial period. Ethiopia symbolizes free and independent Africa, with a powerful inner spiritual and cultural identity. In some versions of pan-Africanist theory, Ethiopia and its empire, along with its king, have been presented as paradigms for all of Black Africa to follow towards achieving independence. Africa, with its Southern and Western regions, and Ethiopia as the core, represents a potential pole for the formation of a fully unified African civilization. Additionally, Western African countries have developed an alternative concept of the Black Egypt identity within African civilization, and by combining these ideas with Southern Africa and Ethiopia, we could have a comprehensive theory of an African pole in the multipolar world.
In the context of multipolarity, BRICS now encompasses six civilizations: Russian, Chinese, Indian, African, Islamic, and Latin American. These civilizations are organized outside the sphere of Western hegemony, resulting in what can be termed a heptapolar world. Within this heptapolar, semi-polar world, we have six poles united against the seventh pole – the globalist liberal pole represented by figures like Soros and Biden, which seeks to preserve unipolarity at any cost.
The world today is divided, with six civilizations forming one side and the West representing the seventh pole, attempting to maintain its position as the unique, universal, and hegemonic force against humanity. These six civilizations are now united within the context of BRICS to resist the pretension of the Western pole to be the sole universal power. This is of absolute importance. We now live in a heptapolar world, divided between six poles on one side and one pole on the other. This is the true essence of multipolarity.
The war in Ukraine serves as one of the borders where the fate of multipolarity is being decided. Ukraine has chosen to align itself with the seventh Western hegemonic pole against Russia and the other BRICS countries. The conflict in Ukraine is emblematic of this divide, with BRICS countries and their expanded structure on one side and the West and its vassals on the other. It is regrettable that independent and proud civilizations like Japan and Europe find themselves in a state of subservience to the United States, controlled by globalist agendas. This is not the United States that we know and could have respected. Instead, it has transformed into a new, post-American entity characterized by radical liberalism, LGBT+ advocacy, artificial intelligence, Sorosism, and the utopia of an individualistic, post-human, trans-human, and trans-gender globalization. European and Japanese identities are being eroded, and they have lost their sovereignty. European Union, which could have offered an alternative, has failed in this regard. Thanks to European integration, Europe has become nothing more than a collective of slaves, vassals, and puppets of the U.S. It’s as if Ukraine has been extended to encompass all of Europe, resulting in a corrupted, perverted, aggressive, and thoroughly disoriented state that has lost its identity.
Nevertheless, in the face of this heptapolar world, with six poles on one side and one pole desperately clinging to its hegemony in the West, it is essential to consider the possibility of multipolarity and a new path for Europe. There are, I believe, opportunities for the USA to reorganize itself as a pole outside the framework of globalization, but this is currently unattainable under the dictatorship of globalist elites. For now, let us focus on how Europe can rescue itself from this predicament.
First and foremost, I believe Europe needs to initiate a rebellion, a revolution, because the current political elites in Europe do not represent the interests of the people or the organic society of European culture. Instead, they are consciously and consistently eroding European spirit, culture, and civilization. Europe is no longer recognizable; it has become post-Europe, an entity intertwined with migrants and other cultural elements that are destroying its essence.
Aleksandr Gelyevich Dugin is a Russian political theorist known for his nationalist views and controversial ideologies. He advocates for a Eurasian empire, challenges Western liberal democracy, and promotes a multipolar world order. Dugin's ideas have influenced nationalist and far-right movements, but his radicalism and alleged connections to fringe groups have drawn criticism. Despite the controversy, he remains a significant figure in the study of Russian political thought and geopolitics.
Post a Comment